Modern vehicles have been increasingly equipped with various chassis control systems, such as an Anti-lock Braking System (ABS), advanced Four Wheel Drive (4WD) systems, Vehicle Stability Assist (VSA) systems, and active suspension systems, such as for example, an Active Damping System (ADS), as ways to further improve vehicle handling quality, drive comfort and stability. However, these chassis control systems usually have been designed and implemented to work independently of one another with only minimal information sharing, although they have been arranged on the same vehicle and may facilitate one another's functions. It is expected that the vehicle overall performance can be further enhanced if the existing chassis control systems are able to share or exchange some operational information.
As an example, in the current state of the art, a vehicle Active Yaw Control system (AYC) is usually designed to control vehicle yaw rate to follow a certain target or desired yaw rate based on some yaw rate reference model. During vehicle operations, AYC constantly monitors the vehicle actual yaw rate and calculates the difference between the actual yaw rate and the target yaw rate (i.e. yaw rate error). When the vehicle yaw rate difference is larger than some preset threshold limit, AYC initiates to regulate the yaw rate by applying a corrective yaw moment through differential braking, for example, applying braking to the outside wheels of the vehicle to mitigate oversteering (OS) or applying braking to the inner-side wheels of the vehicle to reduce understeer (US).
These braking applications are effective in reducing the vehicle yaw rate error and, thus, maintain driver intended line trace while ensuring vehicle stability, but at the same time, because they are braking operations, they slow down the vehicle and are also obtrusive to the driver. In addition, in the case of a vehicle that is also equipped with an active drive torque modulation system, such as Front Wheel Drive (FWD), Rear Wheel Drive (RWD) or 4WD control devices, there is a possibility that while the AYC is applying braking to an individual wheel of the vehicle, the drive torque control system may be still delivering some drive torque to the same wheel, causing conflicting torque control and power wastage.
In another vehicle control situation, the braking efficiency and stability of a vehicle is dependent upon many factors, such as initial speed, surface conditions, wheel load distribution, braking pressure, etc. During normal vehicle braking (where wheels are not significantly slipping), braking pressure is directly related to the driver braking pedal force, while during hard braking with ABS activation, the braking pressure is modulated to regulate wheel slip around some preset optimal region to maximize braking force while maintaining vehicle stability. Since the braking pressure modulation logic does not have any prior knowledge about the wheel loads, whose fluctuations cause considerable variation in achievable braking force and thus compromise braking efficiency, it is desirable that the wheel load variation be kept as small as possible during braking operation.
In yet another situation, tire-road friction and road profile roughness considerably affect ADS performance. For example, on high-mu flat surfaces, such as dry concrete and asphalt roads, ADS is primarily calibrated to control body motion so as to enhance vehicle handling characteristics, while on rough or low-mu surfaces, such as a bumpy road, or snow and ice roads, ADS is primarily set to facilitate driving comfort and drivability. In the current state of art, ADS calibration is usually a trade-off amongst vehicle handling performance on flat high-mu surfaces, ride comfort on bumpy roads, and drivability and stability on low-mu roads.
Different vehicle operation conditions require different ADS settings to achieve optimal overall vehicle performance in terms of handling and body motion control, ride comfort, drivability and stability. For example, for low coefficient of friction operations, a soft ADS setting provides the best drivability and stability, for rough road operation, a moderate ADS setting offers very good road isolation, ride comfort and body motion control, while on high coefficient of friction operations, a firm ADS setting provides best body motion control and handling stability.
Ideally, the ADS setting should be automatically adjusted according to the prevailing operation conditions to enhance vehicle overall performance. However, the current ADS systems only stay on one predetermined setting, often pre-selected by the driver, and do not change setting automatically based directly on sensed road conditions.
In another vehicle control situation within the current state of the art, Traction Control Systems (TCS) are designed to regulate wheel slip around some preset optimal region to maximize wheel traction. During vehicle operation, TCS constantly monitors the slip ratio of each wheel of the vehicle. The slip ratio typically is the difference between wheel speed and vehicle speed, divided by the vehicle's speed or another comparison of wheel and vehicle speed. Whenever excessive wheel slip occurs, TCS brings down the wheel slip to the optimal region through either throttle intervention, braking application or a combination of the two. Since TCS regulates wheel slip on a feedback basis without any prior knowledge about the factors that affect the wheel slip, especially the wheel load (and ground surface friction), whose fluctuations cause considerable wheel slip variation and thus may compromise TCS control efficiency and smoothness, especially during TCS braking operation, it is desirable that the wheel load variation be kept as small as possible during TCS operation.
Therefore, there exists a need in the art for control of a plurality of vehicle subsystems that have not worked together synergistically in the past.